With how close the numbers actually are I wonder if the different biases of different HR people and hiring managers actually cancelled out pretty well.
Put another way: The NAACP didn't change their name, but if you called most black folk I know "colored" they'd punch you in the throat. Language is fluid and all that.
So again I ask: Why the generalization on how a whole mish mosh of people feel.
As we're not actually using real Spanish, such criticisms feel to me like objecting to the way Star Trek dares to boldly split infinitives that have never been split before on the basis that Latin (the language) didn't split them — Latin couldn't split infinitives because infinitives in Latin are single words, just as the -x suffix to denote -[o/a in this case but way more complex when you get to all the other gendered suffixes] doesn't make sense in Spanish.
(And now I'm wondering if anyone says "una hombra" and "un mujero" for trans people…)
This is mainly a comment about English speakers borrowing the word as an exonym, my grasp of the Spanish language itself is "tourist" at best.
That's probably the case for much of California, where they're HQed.
